Surface Integral: Evaluating Double Integral of f.n ds on Sphere

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on evaluating the surface integral of the vector field f = xi + yj - 2zk over the surface of a sphere above the x-y plane. The user struggles with integrating the expression derived from the projection onto the x-y plane and considers the divergence theorem, noting that the divergence of f is zero. They point out that due to the symmetry of the sphere and the odd nature of the integrand, the integral evaluates to zero without needing to perform the integration. The user also encounters issues with polar coordinates leading to a zero denominator, complicating their calculations. Ultimately, the conclusion is that the integral is zero based on symmetry, despite the initial requirement to avoid using the divergence theorem.
anand
Messages
37
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Evaluate [double integral]f.n ds where f=xi+yj-2zk and S is the surface of the sphere x^2+y^2+z^2=a^2 above x-y plane.


The Attempt at a Solution



I know that the sphere's orthogonal projection has to be taken on the x-y plane,but I'm having trouble with the integration.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course, you will have to do upper and lower hemispheres separately. One way to get the projection into the xy-plane is to find the gradient of x2+ y2+z2, 2xi+ 2yj+ 2zk, and "normalize by dividing by 2z: (x/z)i+ (y/z)j+ k. Then n dS is (x/z)i+ (y/z)j+ k dxdy.
f.n dS is ((x2/z)+ (y2/z)- 2z) dxdy. I think I would rewrite that as ((x2/z)+ (y2/z)+ z- 3z) dxdy= ((x2+ y2+ z2)/z- 3z) dxdy= (a^2/z- 3z)dxdy. Now, for the upper hemisphere, z= \sqrt{a^2- x^2- y^2} while for the negative hemisphere it is the negative of that. Because your integrand is an odd function of z, I think the symmetry of the sphere makes this obvious.

Finally, do you know the divergence theorem?
\int\int_T\int (\nabla \cdot \vec{v}) dV= \int\int_S (\vec{v} \cdot \vec{n}) dS
where S is the surface of the three dimensional region T. Here \nabla\cdot f is very simple and, in fact, you don't have to do an integral at all! I wouldn't be surprized to see this as an exercise in a section on the divergence theorm.
 
I know this is a bit embarrassing for me,but how d'you integrate
(a^2/z- 3z)dxdy .After having substituted for z,and converted to polar co-ordinates,I get zero in the denominator!

This is the expression:
[double integral]a^2/(sqrt(a^2-x^2-y^2)) dx dy.
For conversion to polar co-ords,if I substitute x=a cos(theta) and
y=a sin(theta),the denominator becomes zero.

(Thanks a lot for the help anyway:smile: )
 
Why bother to find an anti-derivative? The function is odd in z and the region of integration is symmetric about the origin- the integral is 0.

My point about the divergence theorem is that \nabla \cdot (x\vec{i}+y\cdot\vec{j}-2z\vec{k}) = 1+ 1- 2= 0[/tex]! The integral of that over any region is 0!
 
Thanks a lot.:smile:
(The question did ask not to use divergence theorem,by the way)
 
Did it say you couldn't?:rolleyes:
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K